Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
Uganda decisions
Decisions matching the current search
DMW (U) LTD v Attorney General & Another (CIVIL SUIT NO. 24 OF 2019) [2020] UGHCCD 112 (20 May 2020)
The High Court held that NEMA unlawfully halted DMW (U) Ltd’s sand-mining permits, found both defendants jointly liable, and awarded compensation, special damages, general damages, interest, and costs.
Mseto and Another v Attorney General of Tanzania (Reference 7 of 2016) [2018] EACJ 44 (21 June 2018) (First Instance Division)
The Court found that the Minister's order banning Mseto was issued without adequate reasons, failed to establish how the publication specifically violated public interest, peace, or good order, and did not afford the Applicants a reasonable opportunity to respond. The order was found to be arbitrary, disproportionate, and not anchored in law as required by both the EAC Treaty and international human rights standards. The Court held that while freedom of expression and press freedom are not absolute, any restriction must be lawful, necessary, and proportionate. The Respondent failed to demonst…
Source excerpt
Rock Petroleum (U) Ltd v Uganda Revenue Authority (HCT-00-CC-OS 9 of 2009) [2010] UGCommC 42 (18 July 2010)
The court found that the Uganda Revenue Authority could not legally impose and collect the increased Excise Duty on diesel and petrol from 1st November 2007 to 27th June 2008, as the provisional collection order had expired and the Excise Tariff (Amendment) Act No. 5 of 2008 was enacted with fatal ambiguities regarding its commencement date and reference to a non-existent schedule. The corrigenda issued by the Uganda Printing and Publishing Corporation could not cure substantive legislative errors, as only Parliament has the mandate to amend or correct Acts. The court held that, in the face o…
Source excerpt
Paul Mills Ekwang v Lira District Land Board [2007] UGHC 37 (12 July 2007)
The court found that the applicant had established a prima facie case for leave to file an application for judicial review. The applicant demonstrated that he had a legitimate interest in the suit land, had made efforts to comply with lease requirements, and was denied renewal of his lease without being given a hearing, contrary to the rules of natural justice. The seriousness of the complaint, involving deprivation of a valuable property interest and alleged administrative unfairness, warranted judicial investigation. The court exercised its discretion to grant leave, finding that the issues…
Source excerpt
